Court to issue verdict on TRO funds case

[TamilNet, Friday, 01 December 2006, 12:21 GMT]The Colombo High Court Judge, after receiving the written submissions by the Lawyers representing the Tamils Rehabilitation Organization (TRO), and by the Attorney General representing the Central Bank of Sri Lanka, set 11 December 2006 as the next court date when a decision on the Court’s jurisdiction would be conveyed to the parties, legal sources in Colombo said.

"When the TRO representative attending court [on 29 November] to observe the proceedings was entering the courtroom, the Police at the door stopped him and recorded his name, passport number, Sri Lanka address, and U.S.A. address. The Police did not record any of the other 100 plus persons who attended court for various other cases in the same courtroom.

"The Police did not record these details from any persons during the first hearing on 20 November," the TRO said in a press release issued from Colombo Friday.

At the last hearing on 20 November 2006 the Attorney General’s representative objected to the High Court of Colombo hearing TRO’s appeal of the 4 September 2006 order by the High Court to “freeze” TRO’s bank accounts.

As a result of this objection the Judge told both parties to return to court on 27 November 2006 with “written submissions” on the question of the High Court’s jurisdiction to hear the TRO appeal to “vacate or vary” the 4 September order freezing the TRO accounts, the release further said.

Case History:

28August 2006: TRO learns that its bank accounts have been “frozen”

4 September 2006: Ex parte hearing in High Court. CBSL petitions for an extension of the freeze for 6 months. Petition was granted by the court without TRO having the opportunity to respond to the petition. Approximately Rs. 80,000,000 frozen.

18 October 2006: TRO, after filing a request with the court, receives a copy of the Central Bank’s 4 September petition and supporting documentation. TRO has to date still not received any formal notice from the court or the Attorney General’s Department regarding this case.

16 November 2006: TRO files petition and supporting documentation with High Court.

20 November 2006: Case is to be heard in court but Attorney Generals Department raises objections to the High Court’s jurisdiction. Both parties asked to submit arguments on the point of law and return to court.